Wednesday, January 04, 2012

The Marxist doctrine of Politically Correct Multiculturalism — which is now ascendant virtually throughout the West — emphasizes the indoctrination of children through the media, the schools, and even the day-care centers. Program them young, and they’re programmed for life.

The video below is a sample of multiculti indoctrination for little kids from Finnish television. It has been somewhat — ahem — enhanced by Vlad Tepes. Many thanks to KGS for the translation:

15
comments:

"The Marxist doctrine of Politically Correct Multiculturalism — which is now ascendant virtually throughout the West..."

PC MC is not "Marxist". If it were, then that means that (to name a few) Eisenhower, Rudolph Giuliani, McCain, Glenn Beck, George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Texas Republican Governor Perry, and nearly the entire body of professors who count themselves as supporters of the philosophy of Eric Voegelin (a staunch anti-Communist and traditionalist who was often deemed "too conservative" for most people) are all "Marxist" -- for every one of these listed as parroted PC MC givens about Islam and about Muslims.

PC MC is essentially collectivist, and though it has intellectual roots stretching back to Utilitarianism it is clearly not justified by pure Utilitarianism (which only justified a humanist collective, not the preservation of ethnic distinctions).

Nor is it truly "Marxist" if we mean having been formulated as an essential part of Marxist theory or developed naturally from direct implementation of Marxist socialism. Socialism, aiming for the reduction of all persons to identical interests and abilities, cannot ever tolerate PC MC as a feature of society.

However, while the tenets of PC MC are not acceptable within a socialist state, it was Marxists who realized that they are useful for destroying the social order of other kinds of nations...and that a prolonged exposure to the evils of PC MC would make people more willing to embrace socialism as a means of abolishing PC MC from their nations. It thus has been primarily Marxists who have promoted PC MC and propagandized Western culture to accept PC MC as the ultimate expression of virtue and opposition to PC MC as the ultimate vice.

So it is natural that PC MC appears to be a feature of non-marxist socialism, despite the fact that the most rabid proponents have always been Marxists. Such was the intention all along, to make PC MC firmly entrenched evils of capitalist socialism (as opposed to both Marxist socialism and individual free enterprise) so as to convince people that adopting Marxist socialism would be acceptable as a means of ridding themselves of PC MC.

Of course, as a form of socialism, PC MC is absolutely harmless to a system of actually free individual enterprise. As long as people are accustomed to act as individuals and deal with others as individuals, it doesn't matter a bit whether they have been fed a line about the perfect equality of all cultures or races or whatever.

I don't doubt your view is shared by most here at GOV. It all shades off too uncomfortably, for me, into amorphously Illuminatish, quasi-Masonic, semi-neo-Gnostic alienation. I.e., it's just going too far to explain the problem.

Of course, all this depends on one's definition of "PC MC". Unfortunately, it's not like "agate" or "platypus", where different relatively reasonable people could agree on a common definition without too much (if any) complex wrangling.

I use the term PC MC to denote a palpable, albeit not entirely unamorphous sociopolitical process which has long historical roots, but whose mainstream dominance in the past half century is the relevant crux of the matter. While Marxists may have wished to control and thence to subjugate the Marxism-resistant West through the development of something like PC MC, that doesn't necessarily mean that the PC MC that now dominates is that very same spawn conceived by them.

To see it this way is to look at the history of the West over the past couple of centuries with curious blinders, and to tend to view Marxism as some kind of demonic entity in its own right, rather than as the derivative deformation it was, developing out of the larger roiling currents of Western sociopolitical ferment preceding and consequent upon the French Revolution. While Marxism has been able to infect, and to inspire, mass movements among already compromised populations (Russians, Chinese, and various Third World cultures), there is insufficient evidence that it has been successful in infiltrating the relatively healthier West -- not for want of trying, of course.

But the whole point of PC MC is that it is a term denoting precisely the failure of Marxism (or its pale cousin, "Leftism") to gain sociopolitical dominance without serious compromises that effectively ruin the goal.

I.e., Marxism is simply one symptom among many of the larger process of the West's convulsions unto Modernity, whose future no one knows, not even the Son. Along the way, PC MC has developed, and has come into mainstream dominance -- organically, not diabolically -- as part of the unfolding of the logic of the West's Graeco-Roman Judaeo-Christian tradition. It has here and there seemed to partake of Marxism and Leftism, only because Marxism and Leftism, in turn, are part of that roiling.

PC MC didn't have to devolve deterministically this way: it could well be just a fashionable blip along the way, which will fade away as superficially as it has taken hold.

All this makes sense, however, only if one really takes seriously, and appreciates with appropriate reverence, the greatness of the West -- which means that the West cannot be as hollow and vulnerable to depravity as all your insulting prognostications and diagnoses make it out to be.

This is not to say that there do not exist in various places (many high places) in Europe quite a few deformed civil servants and political leaders; but to whittle them down into "Marxists" is to bracket out important data which would complicate that limiting caricature, and may de-demonize too many people, I suppose, such as to spoil the internecine apocalyptics indulged in.

Anyway, I do not doubt that the essential tenets of "Political Correctness" and "Multi-culturalism" can be disputed (leaving aside the reasonableness of doing so). Of more particular interest, it is certainly true that PC MC is specific to elements in Western culture, no other society would tolerate such a denigration of its own essential good. There are two main roots of the healthy values of inclusion and tolerance on which the perversions of PC MC depend. Out of the Christian tradition, the universalism of one savior for all humanity based on forgiveness of sins. Out of the Roman tradition, the ethical structures that permitted an empire to rule dozens of different cultures. As the evolution of Western civilization essentially redefined and abandoned the goals of imperialism, it combined with Christian ideas about individual merit regardless of nationality or birth.

Still, the perversion that allowed PC MC to justify itself was very recent, and isn't an organic development of Western Civilization at all. It may be argued that it is natural for antithetical intellectual movements to begin and gain force wherever they are not successfully repressed, but the development of atheistic collectivism in the 19th century was no more an organic part of the development of Western Civilization than a parasite is an organic part of its host.

And PC MC is clearly a rejection of the fundamental ideas of personal responsibility for one's own actions which underlie the main sources of Western culture. It demands that people be given consideration based on their "group" so that "groups" aren't unequally treated, which directly conflicts with the demands of Western tradition for individual justice. There are other groups than the Marxists which have carried forward the cause of PC MC as the redefining morality for the modern age, but they all share the same intellectual heritage of originating as a rejection of essential Western values.

And the idea that Marxists do not play a significant role in any country that has not already suffered the ravages of a Communist revolution is not supported by the history of Marxism or the theory. Genuine Marxists tend to be quite scarce in overtly Communist nations...the attraction of the Utopian ideals of the theory tends to be lost on those intimately acquainted with the actual practice. The field for the committed Marxist to ply their trade of encouraging revolution is in those countries which have not yet seen one, according to the theory.

So while PC MC is certainly a tool devised to fit the vulnerabilities of Western Civilization, it cannot be reasonably questioned that Marxists have been significant in wielding it (one need only look at the number of avowed Marxists influentially involved in promoting PC MC compared to their prevalence in the society at large). And the resistance to PC MC is all clearly centered in bastions of the traditional roots of Western culture.

It may be that Secular Humanism or Utilitarianism, under new guises but not fully assimilated to Marxism, are still important enough to be considered significant movers of PC MC. But neither has the revolutionary fervor of Marxism. Both are willing to undermine Western culture, but only Marxism seriously plots its total destruction and overthrow. And the documented activities and intentions of Marxist and international Communist organizations reveals ample evidence that they intentionally designed and promoted PC MC as a means of crippling Western culture to prepare it for revolution.

Any documentation of similar intentional activity on the part of the Secular Humanist and Utilitarian strains of anti-Western atheism is severely lacking. Even as such entities carry forth the agenda of PC MC, they express no clear understanding of why (which is puzzling, since PC MC is theoretically as repugnant to both Secular Humanism and Utilitarianism in their universal tendencies as it is practically incompatible with Marxist-Socialist government).

So I think it reasonable to accept that PC MC is primarily a tool of Marxism and significantly designed and promoted by Marxists for their stated purposes of creating revolution against existing Western culture. It may be right to say that it is not proven with scientific rigor, but until some evidence to the contrary is produced I am willing to work under the provisional understanding that the existing evidence suggests.

Hi Chiu: You will come to admire Hesperado's dogged defense of the West.

Hesperado is an optimist who truly believes that man is fundamentally good which is WHY the West adopted PC MC and accepts Muslims as their PC MC darlings with more violence leading to more love for PC MC.

I, on the other hand, am a hollow, depraved, and insulting pessimist who thinks that Westerners are intellectually lazy - and moral cowards who studiously avoid the truth about Islam - and Muslims - because then we might have to DO something BAD (at least according to PC MC standards). You know, like completely close ALL mosques - everywhere - including Mecca! :)

As the song goes, "You say potato, and I say potato."

I still really enjoy reading The Hesperado and his blog, as I have mentioned to him. :)

Oh yeah, I left you a comment about God and slavery - at A Furious Tide.

I personally believe that humans are fundamentally good...compared to me, which is not saying very much.

That is, it is a miracle of God that humans are able to live moment to moment rather than flopping about like expiring fish and dying from sheer incompetence. But an explicable miracle evidenced in the marvelous design of the human body which vigorously resists all but the most determined efforts of the human spirit to fail to sustain it properly.

Thus, in comparison to the level of goodness necessary for life to continue without constant intervention, most humans are not good at all.

But in absolute terms, perfect evil is the zero-point and goodness is always a positive non-zero value. Humans are above the zero-point, so they are somewhat good. But even Satan and his followers remain (for now) above the zero-point. Eventually the darkness will consume them entirely...as it will consume some humans (past and present).

Ultimately, everything is always falling towards the zero-point or ascending towards God's unlimited trajectory. Most humans are ascending rather than falling. But of those only a few will not reach some personal asymptotic limit, a level that they will always be drawn towards by divinity but never quite reach or exceed.

Well, I must suppose that such meditations really have very little to do with the practical issues of the Counter-Jihad.